dittybopper:f you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Because NYC is very different them yokelsville, south hickstucky.

The chance of law enforcement or others not being readily available to you if you need help is lower (especially in a place like the farking empire state building). You have a far greater chance of hitting something other than a cow or a barn if you miss your target. What passes for threatening\suspicious behavior in bumblefark is just how we hail cabs or tell the guy selling us a dirty water dog to go heavy on the onions.

and most of all, we don't live in fear afraid of our own shadows every day.

Nothing against guns, but CCW in a place like NYC is far more trouble than it is worth.

incawarrior:The security at the Empire State Building is a little odd. I once visited with some friends and they don't let you bring knives or wrenches up there for some reason. They do have little boxes that they'll store stuff in until you come back down at least.

I guess they don't want anyone to hijack the building and crash it into an airplane or something.

because you know, when I'm up on the observation deck, it strikes me as a perfect time to open some boxes, or fix their plumbing.

Its a famous high profile site with lots of people in close quarters. I

spmkk:Fine - your killing and menacing of the English language put aside, here's a better comparison: Drivers' licenses from state to state are honored, but gun permits are not. Meanwhile, VASTLY more people each year are killed and injured by cars than by guns. And while driving is a privilege (i.e. nobody technically has to grant it), gun possession is supposedly a constitutionally protected right.

Yet people like yourself are perfectly OK with someone going to jail as a result of the latter being denied, while you would no doubt be up in arms (so to speak) about any infringement on the former. And because there are more people who drive cars than there are gun owners, society condones that. There's a term for this - it's called tyranny of the majority.

And the car analogy is another one I hate. The main purpose of a car is to get people from point A to point B, the main purpose of a firearm is to kill another living being. The two should not be talked about in the same argument. It's just as silly as when someone gets stabbed to death and all the gun nuts snark "lol, let's ban knives!!1!".

How about this? You don't like NYC's gun laws? Then please don't go there. Most people in NYC are perfectly fine with the restrictive carry laws that are in place.

Mateorocks:Or, you know, he could just leave it at home. But that would just be a crazy thing to do.

If he did that, how would he be able to live out his "Death Wish" fantasy, wherein some street tough in a leather jacket steals his wife's purse, allowing him to waste the guy with one shot through the back?

Enemabag Jones:As much as I understand that NY gun laws are pretty unforgiving....

Yet another tourist brings his gun from out of state into another state, not just anther state, but NY, without checking the gun laws assuming everything will be ok.

I am very reasonable, but you would think that at some point people would farking learn not to assume one state has the same law as the next.

/Note, lack of knowledge about a law is not considered a reasonable defense in other threads, why should it be the same for something concerning gun laws.

When I got my handgun permit, they were very clear in saying, "this is only valid under these circumstances. Anything beyond that, the obligation is on you to figure out the applicable laws, and penalties may be severe for violating them"

LineNoise:The chance of law enforcement or others not being readily available to you if you need help is lower (especially in a place like the farking empire state building). You have a far greater chance of hitting something other than a cow or a barn if you miss your target. What passes for threatening\suspicious behavior in bumblefark is just how we hail cabs or tell the guy selling us a dirty water dog to go heavy on the onions.

In other words, visitors should be asking themselves "what circumstance could possibly arise that would necessitate my carrying a pistol?" Other than a subway tunnel rat shoot, or cookin' up some Central Park squirrel or sidewalk pigeon for vittles, there isn't any.

dittybopper:Yanks_RSJ: No, the most correct thing a gun owner can do before traveling is to learn the gun laws in the specific area to which he will be traveling.

In NYC, you cannot carry a firearm without a permit issued by the city itself.

Because of the byzantine nature of local, state, and federal laws, along with the fact that some places chose to ignore federal laws about 'safe passage' (I'm looking at you NJ and NYC), what we really need is national reciprocity.

If you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

But where is that? In a bar? a casino? a school? a courtroom? the statehouse? the state penitentiary? Different states have different standards for each of these.

Typically if you are clean NYC will also let you plead these down to something that doesn't require jail. Provided you don't turn it into a high profile thing that they can use to raise awareness, like cry to a paper, or be a football player who shoots himself in the foot in a club. Then they will throw the book at you.

Also CSB: when unsure on the law or if there is ambiguity, you act on the side of caution. For instance, there used to be a gun range that was walking distance from my house. The law here on transporting a gun was very vague as to if it was ok for me to just walk there with it. So I would drive there, placing the gun in my trunk. Even though it wasn't uncommon for me to end up with a parking space that was just as far as if I walked there to begin with.

Just an FYI for you tourists visiting NYC: the New York of Midnight Cowboy, Taxi Driver and Fort Apache the Bronx hasn't existed in decades. Most tourist areas are safe and in Times Square there's a big old police substation.

spmkk dittybopper: "Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.Deal?"While this may sound like a good and reasonable idea on the surface, absolute terms like this scare me. The right of a woman to protect herself and her kids from an abusive ex-husband should NOT be subject to the whims of a background-check system that would deny an Army veteran the right to own a gun based on a single marijuana conviction more than 40 years ago.Until a system is universally perfect, we should question the wisdom of subjecting people to it universally. That's how we got things like minimum sentencing requirements.

And due to the fact that gun cannot be restricted based on a series of somewhat random physical classifications (as is used with any classification system), the above will be used. Criminal records and arrests, no matter how minor.

dittybopper:Yanks_RSJ: No, the most correct thing a gun owner can do before traveling is to learn the gun laws in the specific area to which he will be traveling.

In NYC, you cannot carry a firearm without a permit issued by the city itself.

Because of the byzantine nature of local, state, and federal laws, along with the fact that some places chose to ignore federal laws about 'safe passage' (I'm looking at you NJ and NYC), what we really need is national reciprocity.

If you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Tommy Moo:You just get arrested for possession of a legal gun at the Empire State Building? Is this like a NYC law? I live upstate, and you are definitely not simply arrested for having a legal gun with permit on you in public. It sounds like going up to a security guard/cop and informing them that you are carrying, and asking what the policy is for the premises, and if you can leave a gun with someone, is just about the most correct thing you can do in this situation.

hardinparamedic KelvinTheClown: Remember, gay marriage licenses from state to state will be honored, but your gun permit is not.Your name is appropriate.Hint: It's a State's right not to honor your permit. Your type is all about state rights, right?

If we had national reciprocity, it would make it significantly easier for me to own a handgun in my own state (NY).

It would essentially turn NYS into a "shall issue" state, which it isn't now. I'd put up with the crap to get a pistol permit (which is required even to possess a modern handgun) if it meant I could actually carry it outside of "Hunting and Target Shooting Only".

dittybopper:Because of the byzantine nature of local, state, and federal laws, along with the fact that some places chose to ignore federal laws about 'safe passage' (I'm looking at you NJ and NYC), what we really need is national reciprocity.

If you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

Tell you what, you have a deal.

Go to NYC right now with a concealed pistol and tell every police officer that you're armed. If any of them have a problem with it, have them drop me an email.

I find it interesting that the National Rifle Association was created because only an estimated 1 in 1,000 of Union soldiers bullets would hit their targets (to teach people marksmanship) and it somehow morphed into Politicon: Derp Transformer and Protector of The Fearfully Helmeted.

HotWingConspiracy:dittybopper: Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

No way. You want to take away regulatory power from the local government in exchange for something we're going to get eventually anyway.

Sounds fair to me. Especially since the ability to 3D print a plastic frame for a handgun, to which you can add unregulated parts to build a handgun, would largely nullify the unpleasant possible consequences of universal background checks, and that ability is just around the corner: They've 3D printed plastic AR-15 lower receivers that lasted 600+ rounds without failing.

I find it interesting that the National Rifle Association was created because only an estimated 1 in 1,000 of Union soldiers bullets would hit their targets (to teach people marksmanship) and it somehow morphed into Politicon: Derp Transformer and Protector of The Fearfully Helmeted.

I recall reading somewhere that in the 1950s the NRA was all about teaching firearm safety and (as you mentioned) marksmanship and skill. They were even in favor of reasonable laws concerning firearms.

I like the apt description of Derp Transformer but in this case I fear there is less than meets the eye.

dittybopper:HotWingConspiracy: dittybopper: Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

No way. You want to take away regulatory power from the local government in exchange for something we're going to get eventually anyway.

Sounds fair to me. Especially since the ability to 3D print a plastic frame for a handgun, to which you can add unregulated parts to build a handgun, would largely nullify the unpleasant possible consequences of universal background checks, and that ability is just around the corner: They've 3D printed plastic AR-15 lower receivers that lasted 600+ rounds without failing.

Well have fun with that, your criminal ambitions are for a matter for the proper authorities.

HotWingConspiracy:dittybopper: HotWingConspiracy: dittybopper: Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

No way. You want to take away regulatory power from the local government in exchange for something we're going to get eventually anyway.

Sounds fair to me. Especially since the ability to 3D print a plastic frame for a handgun, to which you can add unregulated parts to build a handgun, would largely nullify the unpleasant possible consequences of universal background checks, and that ability is just around the corner: They've 3D printed plastic AR-15 lower receivers that lasted 600+ rounds without failing.

Well have fun with that, your criminal ambitions are for a matter for the proper authorities.

"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire 600 shots or only 599?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a 3D printed AR-16, a homemade hobbyist replica of one of the most influential selective-fire rifle designs in the world, and could blow up in my face, I've got to ask you one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do I, punk?"

Satanic_Hamster:dittybopper: Because of the byzantine nature of local, state, and federal laws, along with the fact that some places chose to ignore federal laws about 'safe passage' (I'm looking at you NJ and NYC), what we really need is national reciprocity.

If you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Tell you what: In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?

Tell you what, you have a deal.

Go to NYC right now with a concealed pistol and tell every police officer that you're armed. If any of them have a problem with it, have them drop me an email.

Sure. Just as soon as Congress passes it and the president signs it (or Congress over-rides the veto).

Secondarily, I'd also accept a Supreme Court decision that does essentially the same thing.

If you get caught illegally carrying a firearm, what's the difference in charges between carrying a 'loaded pistol' and carrying an 'unloaded pistol?'

On the same note, what's with the sudden frenzy of describing every gun anyone is ever caught carrying as 'loaded?' Anyone with any sense about firearms knows that any gun that is still assembled is loaded... whether that are actually cartridges in the gun or not.

Enemabag Jones:"I am very reasonable, but you would think that at some point people would farking learn not to assume one state has the same law as the next.

/Note, lack of knowledge about a law is not considered a reasonable defense in other threads, why should it be the same for something concerning gun laws."

Because outside of gun laws, there are VERY few things (about the only two that come to mind are age-of-consent variances and marijuana distribution) that are perfectly legal in one state but will get you charged with a felony in another.

We're also not talking about someone who assumed everything was unregulated and carrying a gun wherever you wanted was cool. He applied for, received and possessed a valid CCW permit. He also respected local regulations (once he learned that they exist) and asked the right people how he could comply with them. In return he got thrown in jail.

It is reasonable for states to have different laws about, say, vehicle emissions standards. It's reasonable for states to charge different tax rates on cigarettes. The variation that exists in gun laws between different states (and in cases like NYC and Chicago, between different cities) is NOT reasonable, and it is unreasonable to expect citizens to possess adequate knowledge of the laws of each place within their own country that they might travel to, given both the volume and obscurity of this information.

You can argue reciprocity and how unjust it is that there are any restrictions at all on your ability to be armed all you like. If you seriously think it's a good idea to bring a gun to the Empire State Building, you're a complete f*ckwit, and have no business owning things that require a responsible adult to operate.

Englebert Slaptyback:I recall reading somewhere that in the 1950s the NRA was all about teaching firearm safety and (as you mentioned) marksmanship and skill. They were even in favor of reasonable laws concerning firearms.

The change came in 1977, in response to a bunch of enacted and proposed gun control laws.

The NRA changed to be more politically active in *RESPONSE* to gun control.

I mean, would you be surprised if the National Hot Rod Association started becoming more politically active in the wake of attempts to ban 2 seater sports cars, cars with racing stripes, and cars capable of exceeding the national speed limit? I certainly wouldn't be.

We're also not talking about someone who assumed everything was unregulated and carrying a gun wherever you wanted was cool. He applied for, received and possessed a valid CCW permit. He also respected local regulations (once he learned that they exist) and asked the right people how he could comply with them. In return he got thrown in jail.

"Hello Officer. No, I didn't know that the speed limit is 55mph here. How can I go about complying with that? Wait, why are you writing me a ticket?!?"

He had already committed the offense at that point. He should have known how to comply beforehand.

I mean, would you be surprised if the National Hot Rod Association started becoming more politically active in the wake of attempts to ban 2 seater sports cars, cars with racing stripes, and cars capable of exceeding the national speed limit? I certainly wouldn't be.

I don't recall saying or even implying that I was surprised. It was more of a "wish they still did stuff like that" kind of sentiment. They used to have a good mission as an organization and I would like to see them return to their roots.

In all fairness, the guy DID ask if there was a place to store his pistol. It's not like he barged in and started waving it around like a retard. I just think its kind of stupid that he got arrested. Your tax dollers at work folks.